Teaching of Evolution (your thoughts?)

Do you agree evolution should be taught?

yes	67.3%	[ 1018 ]
no	13.2%	[ 199 ]
I'm not sure.. but I want gold :3	19.5%	[ 295 ]
Total Votes:			[ 1512 ]

[Overlord484]

Evolution is a scientific theory
Creationsim/ID is not even a scientific theory

If you're one of those idiots who thinks that Evolution is just another religious myth, ask yourself: "Which religion does Evolution belong to?" and remember atheism is NOT a religion. There are no atheist churches, and there are no atheist holidays.

[Hobbitses4EVA]

There are too many myths of creation for anyone to say, "This is how it really happened." Besides, they don't even make sense. Evolution should be taught in schools. All the evidence so far points to it anyway.

[xXKokoroHodokiXx]

People don't have to study evolution.

They also don't have to pass science.

[tearsoftruth]

I think that it is perfectly reasonable to teach evolution, one theory
IF
alternative theories and arguments are presented as well

There is a VERY good argument for Intelligent design and Creationisim.
Look at the Institute for Creation Research.

[xXKokoroHodokiXx]

tearsoftruth

I think that it is perfectly reasonable to teach evolution, one theory
IF
alternative theories and arguments are presented as well

There is a VERY good argument for Intelligent design and Creationisim.
Look at the Institute for Creation Research.

Unfortunately, creation is not a scientific theory, and thusly shouldn't be taught as science.

[Masturbating_Rot_Crow]

In a private school, go for it, but in a public school? You NEED to teach evolution, There is seperation between church and state and you don't see the hindu kids running around going "No! The Vedas say that the world was born this way!!"
If any family has a problem with it, just oull your kid form the class that week like they do health class come sex ed time. Don't make the rest of us stupid for your damn morals.
Yeah, evolution is just a theory. So is gravity.
It's got more proof behind it than the idea that the world is only 6,000 years old.

[Crazyjust4u]

redem

Crazyjust4u

Yes, like someone in this thread named Miekka pointed out neither Evolution or Intelligent design can absolutley be proven at this point in time. The problem is that it is know being taught as fact

Nothing in science can be proven absolutely. And never will be. We teach theories as the current best explanations for observed phenomenon. Like the directly observed phenomenon of evolution.
We teach them fairly simply at first, with more detail as the education gets more detailed about a subject.
This is true of everything in science classes, why would we pretend that evolution is any different? Or that ID belongs there at all?
There is no scientific opposition to evolution, just religious. And frankly I don't care if your religion doesn't agree with reality.

Crazyjust4u

And, the Bible is more than just fairy tales even die hard athiests know that there is quite a bit of historical articles in the Bible. It is no more a compilation of Fairy tales than The Origin of Species is a mystery novel.

Myth != Fairy tale.

Crazyjust4u

And, yes Intelligent Design should be reorganized oh wait it is being reorganized. The thing is that as more evidence emerges there is less and less for Evolution and more for ID. Just for one example there is a complete lacking of intermediate species. Evolution is reliant on the possiblity of intermediate species those gradually mutating into another. However, there aren't any that have been found.

Every species is an intermediary, unless it was the last in it's line. And there are ample examples of fossils that give a clear line of descent for most modern groups of animals. All the major ones, certainly.

Crazyjust4u

In fact if Charles Darwin was alive today I can guarantee you he wouldn't believe in Darwinian Evolution because, and this is a direct quote he said, "If we do not find numerous examples of intermediate species my ideas will be for naught."

Good thing we found them then. And quote mining is bad.

That's where you're wrong. There is quite a bit of scientific opposition to Evolution it is single handedly the most scientifically controversial topic in society today. Trumping issues of Euthanasia and right to life in abortion cases. And, ID is not necessarily religious it is very scientific. It is the theory that the enviornment of this world is so complex that chances are so statistically slim that this earth would be where it is today based solely on chance.

And, where do you get these ideas of "The bible's just a bunch of myths/fairy tales"? Please don't make claims which you cannot back up.

I don't quite understand how you mean that every species is intermediate? Do you think you could expound on that or give some examples? Please try to avoid links.

One last thing, what do you mean by "quote mining"?

[Beyond_Oblivion]

tearsoftruth

I think that it is perfectly reasonable to teach evolution, one theory
IF
alternative theories and arguments are presented as well

Name an alternative scientific theory. There should be a great amount of dificulty here since if you can state another theory, neither would be theories.

Quote:

There is a VERY good argument for Intelligent design and Creationisim.

Care to provide evidence for ID? Actual evidence; none of this 'That couldn't evolve' stuff since that has been shown repeatedly incorrect since it relies on the flawed concet of irreducible complexity.

Quote:

Look at the Institute for Creation Research.

The Institute for Creation Research are a lot of morally and intelectually bankrupt individuals. They are willing to undergo quaote mining (which is unethical research) and present false information.

[Lord Yuhuang Shangti]

tearsoftruth

I think that it is perfectly reasonable to teach evolution, one theory
IF
alternative theories and arguments are presented as well

There is a VERY good argument for Intelligent design and Creationisim.
Look at the Institute for Creation Research.

Creationism is a belief, evolution is not only a scientific theory, but there is hard evidence that evolution exists. (The flu virus evolves every year)
The question isn't whether or not evolution is real, it's whether we have evolved from prior animals.

That's why evolution is taught in science class, where as creationism is taught in philosophy class, and that's why it should stay that way.

[CommandoDude]

ack, yes TEACH the theory of evolution

stop with this creationism garbage

[Crazyjust4u]

Masturbating_Rot_Crow

In a private school, go for it, but in a public school? You NEED to teach evolution, There is seperation between church and state and you don't see the hindu kids running around going "No! The Vedas say that the world was born this way!!"
If any family has a problem with it, just oull your kid form the class that week like they do health class come sex ed time. Don't make the rest of us stupid for your damn morals.
Yeah, evolution is just a theory. So is gravity.
It's got more proof behind it than the idea that the world is only 6,000 years old.

You don't NEED to teach Evolution. And, the separation of church and state if you actually look at it in depth it's purpose is not to keep religion out of the government or government ordained venues (schools, courthouses, parks, etc.) but meant to keep the government out of religious matters. Besides, ID is not a religious matter. If you look at the proposed theory of Intelligent Design there isn't a religious overtone about it. It doesn't say, "We see scientifically see that Brahama father god of the Hindu religion responsible for the world's inception." There's nothing like that. It merely states that there was something more than chance involved in the origins of the world. And, I do apologize for the 6000 thing there are sadly too many Christianss that get hung up on the age issue when it really hardly matters in the argument.

[Koravin]

Crazyjust4u

Masturbating_Rot_Crow

In a private school, go for it, but in a public school? You NEED to teach evolution, There is seperation between church and state and you don't see the hindu kids running around going "No! The Vedas say that the world was born this way!!"
If any family has a problem with it, just oull your kid form the class that week like they do health class come sex ed time. Don't make the rest of us stupid for your damn morals.
Yeah, evolution is just a theory. So is gravity.
It's got more proof behind it than the idea that the world is only 6,000 years old.

You don't NEED to teach Evolution. And, the separation of church and state if you actually look at it in depth it's purpose is not to keep religion out of the government or government ordained venues (schools, courthouses, parks, etc.) but meant to keep the government out of religious matters. Besides, ID is not a religious matter. If you look at the proposed theory of Intelligent Design there isn't a religious overtone about it. It doesn't say, "We see scientifically see that Brahama father god of the Hindu religion responsible for the world's inception." There's nothing like that. It merely states that there was something more than chance involved in the origins of the world. And, I do apologize for the 6000 thing there are sadly too many Christianss that get hung up on the age issue when it really hardly matters in the argument.

So, are you actually advocating not teaching science in science class?

[xXKokoroHodokiXx]

Crazyjust4u

And, where do you get these ideas of "The bible's just a bunch of myths/fairy tales"? Please don't make claims which you cannot back up.

The bible is basically mythology.

It can't be proven wrong, can't be proven right and may have some basis in reality.

[Redem]

Crazyjust4u

That's where you're wrong. There is quite a bit of scientific opposition to Evolution it is single handedly the most scientifically controversial topic in society today.

No it isn't. I've never seen any credible opposition to evolution from scientists. Just from creationists, who cannot accept evolution as it contradicts with their pre conceived religious ideas.

There is a healthy scientific scepticism about evolution, as there is about all ideas in science.

The only real opposition to evolution comes from christian fundamentalist groups in the US. Not from scientists.

Crazyjust4u

Trumping issues of Euthanasia and right to life in abortion cases. And, ID is not necessarily religious it is very scientific. It is the theory that the enviornment of this world is so complex that chances are so statistically slim that this earth would be where it is today based solely on chance.

And this is scientific how? it's bad philosophy, not science. it is at heart little more than an argument from personal incredulity.

Crazyjust4u

And, where do you get these ideas of "The bible's just a bunch of myths/fairy tales"? Please don't make claims which you cannot back up.

That's not a quote from me. And simply corrected you when you implied that the bible cannot be fairy tales because it contains some historical elements. No, it's a myth. The word means something very different. The Greek Myths contained historical elements as well. Doesn't make them true.

Crazyjust4u

I don't quite understand how you mean that every species is intermediate? Do you think you could expound on that or give some examples? Please try to avoid links.

hard to avoid links, when they are the only source one can point to on the net. But sure, here's an example. Every species. All species are intermediaries between those that came before them, and those they evolved into.

Remember that as a population changes over time, i.e. as it evolves, every generation along that evolutionary path is different from the one before it. "Species" is a very fluid term, there is no specific point at which one species stops being one thing, and becomes another. It's entirely arbitrary based on our own judgement of it being different enough. All fossils are representatives of an intermediary species, as they are simply one of a long line of creatures that extends both before and after them.

Crazyjust4u

One last thing, what do you mean by "quote mining"?

Taking quotes out of context.

[Beyond_Oblivion]

Crazyjust4u

That's where you're wrong. There is quite a bit of scientific opposition to Evolution it is single handedly the most scientifically controversial topic in society today.

I would say that what and how dark energy behaves is far more debated than whether or not evolution is a factual process. You see, evolution is an observable, undeniable process. Evolution is fact. The theory of evolution describes this process and has reached the point of being regarded as a fact.

Quote:

And, ID is not necessarily religious it is very scientific.

Only if it is scientific to deny observed phenomena is ID in any was scientific. Seeing that in science repeated observation is king, ID is not anything resembling science.

Quote:

It is the theory that the enviornment of this world is so complex that chances are so statistically slim that this earth would be where it is today based solely on chance.

But it wasn't chance. It was the result of a series of well defined phenomena.

Also, ID is the theory that something designed all life based upon the flawed irreducible complexity, which has been demonstrated incorrect, it has nothing to do with the formation of the planet, its makeup, its environments, or where it is.

Quote:

I don't quite understand how you mean that every species is intermediate? Do you think you could expound on that or give some examples? Please try to avoid links.

Every species is an intermediary species. Furthermore, every generation could be considered an intermediary. Each generation has characteristic deferences from the previous. Each generation is the progression form one species to another. There is not suddenly a new species y from species x, but rather the species blend and are indistinguishable (this can be found in hominid fossils). Thus, every species is an intermediary species between what came before it and whatever comes after it.

Quote:

One last thing, what do you mean by "quote mining"?

Quote mining is an intellectually and morally bankrupt of searching through what someone has said or written for quotes, or more approprieatly portions of quotes, and pasting them together to make it sound as if the person said something entirely different from what they really said. This tactict is often used by ID advocates.